Borrowers Deserve Lenders Who Understand Bitcoin

Humans love to tell stories. A good story explains something about the world we experience, while remaining accessible and easy to understand. And so it should not be surprising that the story of Bitcoin’s rise inside institutions has been told as neat and linear.

The following opinion article was authored by Matt Luongo, the Founder and CEO of Thesis*, the venture studio behind Mezo, tBTC, and Lolli. A developer by background, he’s been building in Bitcoin since 2014 and co-founded Fold, now publicly traded on Nasdaq. Under his leadership, Thesis* has raised capital from a16z, Polychain, ParaFi, and Pantera. Mezo, his current focus, grew out of his own attempt to get a Bitcoin-backed mortgage and the realization that Bitcoin still lacks a functioning credit market. He writes and speaks on self-custody finance, Bitcoin-native lending, and what comes after CeFi.

Every large, public name that announces a new Bitcoin product is another domino falling into place. But behind that press release, there were years of quiet, unsung preparation.

Someone inside already gets it. They have owned Bitcoin for years. They have done the work. They understand what it means. They carry that conviction into the firm. They bring it into conversations, planning cycles, risk exercises and treasury discussions.

More importantly, Bitcoiners are everywhere.

They are in insurance. In venture. In logistics. In payments. In operating roles inside businesses that would never describe themselves as “crypto-native.”

Once you start to see Bitcoiners as a distributed network inside existing institutions, the opportunity begins to look different.

For the last decade, building in Bitcoin has focused on the front door.

How do you get people in?

How do you help them buy?

How do you help them save?

How do you make self-custody less daunting?

All of that mattered. A lot of it still does. But there is another challenge now that the market has not spent enough time building for.

What happens after Bitcoin is already on the balance sheet?

What happens when conviction is no longer the barrier, but capital efficiency is?

A growing number of companies are already closer to this than they realize. They have the asset. They have someone inside the firm who understands why it matters. What they still lack is a financial system that knows how to underwrite them.

That is the shift this market still underrates. Bitcoin is maturing from an asset people buy into collateral businesses should be able to finance against.

The market has become very good at offering Bitcoin exposure. It has done far less to support the firms already holding it.

Borrowers deserve lenders who understand them. And understanding starts with recognizing what these companies are actually trying to do. For a growing class of businesses, Bitcoin is more than a hedge. It is becoming part of a more durable capital strategy, one less dependent on banks, rate cycles and policy choices it cannot control.

That lack of underwriting ability has left businesses squeezed by debt arrangements that do not reflect the quality of their collateral or the strength of their long-term position. Rates are too high. Terms are too rigid. And the market often rewards proximity to the center of the monetary system more than it rewards discipline or resilience.

That is the Cantillon Effect in practice.

The closer you sit to the source of new money, the cheaper your capital. The further out you are, the more you pay. It is a proximity tax, and most companies, especially those trying to build patiently and hold hard assets, are on the wrong side of it.

The result is that borrowers get paired with lenders who do not really understand them or their collateral.

Bitcoin opens the door to a different arrangement.

If Bitcoin is the asset outside that system, then borrowing against it should not require the same political or institutional proximity that the legacy system demands. Bitcoin-backed dollars do not need to inherit every distortion of fiat credit markets. Borrowing against hard collateral in a neutral system, on terms that respect the quality of that collateral, should be normal.

In my career to date, I’ve focused on making Bitcoin more useful. Time and time again, I’ve had to remind myself that Bitcoiners are not limited to “shadowy super coders” or self-custody maximalists.

Today’s Bitcoiners are everywhere in the stack. Some live in the command line. Others live in spreadsheets, balance sheets and Bloomberg terminals. They are builders, operators, treasury teams and decision-makers. That matters, not because personal belief alone changes markets, but because it changes what firms are willing to hold, defend and build around.

The opportunity now is to meet the market where it is.

This is the missing layer in Bitcoin’s financial maturation.

Collateral is not created equal, and the next decade will make clear that not all credit is equal. As the collateral changes, so does the market built on top of it. The firms that understand that shift first will have an advantage over the ones still treating Bitcoin as a side bet rather than a balance-sheet asset.

The next chapter of Bitcoin will be defined by who can borrow against it, build on top of it, and underwrite it with conviction.

The institutions that understand that will not just offer Bitcoin exposure. They will help define the credit market that comes next.